Cummings v. Prater’s Empirical Analysis
1963
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 84 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Sargent v. Ross (1973), Stephens v. Stearns (1984)
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 84 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on 14 Wis. 2d 590 - Pines v. Perssion · Cutter v. Hamlen · Coyner Crop Dusters v. Marsh · Johnson v. O'BRIEN · Cope v. Southern Pac. Co.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The open and obvious condition is merely a factor to be taken into consideration in determining whether the condition was unreasonably dangerous.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he landlord is under a duty of ordinary care to inspect the premises when he had reason to suspect defects existing at the time of the taking of the tenancy and to either repair them or warn the tenant of their existence. In other words he is under the duty to take those precautions for the safety of the tenant as would be taken by a reasonably pm-dent man under similar circumstances.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage““People can get hurt on almost anything. But the mere fact of injury does not compel the conclusion that the condition was unreasonably dangerous. * * * One of the tests used in determining whether a condition is unreasonably dangerous is whether it is ‘open and obvious’ or as it has been better put: ‘If people who are likely to encounter a condition may be expected to take perfectly good care 'of themselves without further precautions, then the condition is not unreasonably dangerous because the likelihood of harm is slight.’ ” Cummings v. Prater, 95 Ariz. 20 , 386 P.2d 27 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.